GOVERNOR'S VETO

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 19, 22 July 1933, Page 17

GOVERNOR'S VETO

BLOCKAGE OF A BILL There is no need to comment on tho following article, which is self-explana-tory. It is published in this column merely to remind latter-day, motorists,, and any of the non-motoring _ public that may happen to read it, that motor organisations have a claim to support and goodwill that is not always forthcoming. The State is California, and the article from a San Francisco paper:— ,- . . Governor Eolph, in vetoing the Craig Road Sign Bill, declared that the measure barring the California State Automobile Association aud Automobilo Club of Southern California from road sign work on State highways "would be a mark of ingratitude in failing to recognise the full value of tho unselfish accomplishments of the pioneers in highway sign posting." He said the measure would;servo no useful purpose and would not be to tho best interests of California motorists or visiting tourists. Tlio Bill would have barred "two California non-profit co-operative motorists' clubs" from roadside activities and would increase tho costs of highway system; ..■> The Governor further said: "Tho system of road signs in California today is second to none of auy State in. the Union. Tho work o£ posting these signs was. inaugurated during the infancy of the motor industry by these co-operativo clubs with no other objective in view than to promote the convenience and safety, of tho motorist. The existing highway sign system in .California is an accomplishment of twenty years of voluntary gratuitous efforts and the investment, paid for by motorists in club dues contributions, represents an outlay of expenditure of well over 1,000,000 dollars during the twenty-year period. "The Bill apparently has aa its purpose the deprivation of the rights of these clubs to continue this work because of the small concession granted to them of including their insignia upon the signs posted. ' "I am informed by the Division of

6600 miles to the State highway system the cost of erecting and maintaining signs would amount to an annual sum of 81,917 dollars, which would come from money now used for roads, "In California there arc over 2,000,000 motorists, many of whom are or the highways each day, dependent for traffic guidance upon tho existing directional signs. Perhaps a few hundred or even less of theso motorists arc personally" interested, in seeing this Bill signed. If, however, I was asked to give a reason for signing' this Bill to anyone of the remainder of the 2,000,000 and more motorists, I would be at a loss to explain, to them why work, which has always been performed st> adequately, efficiently, and effectively.in the past at no State expense, should be transferred to the State at the expense of tho State, "Any explanation I might give, I am sure, would puzzle tho motorist, who has always placed such great faith in these signs."